When did the Sadducees lose control of the Temple and the
religious leadership of the Jews in ancient Judaea? When did the
Pharisees gain control, and keep it, even when the high priest
was a Sadducee? This may not seem like a very important question
but on it depends the solution to the problem of on what day
should Pentecost -- or the Feast of Shavuot, or Weeks -- be
observed? Sunday, as the Sadducees taught? Or Sivan 6, fifty
days after Passover, as the Pharisees taught? Here is historical
and Biblical evidence that must be considered in answering this
crucial question.

William F. Dankenbring

Could the Greek concept of world civilization, Hellenism, be combined
or married to the Jewish notion of a universal God? After Alexander the
Great conquered the world and spread the teachings of Hellenism throughout
the Eastern Mediterranean region, many reformist intellectuals and politically
minded Jews and Greek sought to bridge the gap between Judaism and Grecian
Hellenism. The reformers found the Torah or Law of the Jews to be full
of "fables" and impossible moral demands and countless prohibitions.
Reformers did not want to abolish all the Law, but to "purge"
it of all the elements which prohibited its mergence with Hellenism.

Writes Paul Johnson, "To promote their ultimate aim of a world
religion, they wanted an immediate marriage between the Greek polis and
the Jewish moral God" (A History of the Jews, p.101).
Johnson goes on:

"Unfortunately, this was a contradiction in terms. The Greeks were
not monotheists but polytheists, and in Egypt they learned syncretism,
that is the rationalization of innumerable overlapping deities by hanging
them together into synthetic polygods. One such mutant was Apollo-Helio-Hermes,
the sun-god. They blended their own Dionysiac rites with the Egyptian Isis-cult.
Their god of healing, Asclepios, was conflated with the Egyptian Imhotep.
Zeus, the senior god, was the same as the Egyptian Ammon, the Persian Ahura-Mazda
and, for all they cared, the Jewish Yahweh. That, needless to say, was
not how the pious Jews saw it" (p. 102).

This movement into idolatry and syncretism got a big boost in the time
of Antiochus Epiphanes, in 175 A.D. He was anxious to speed up the Hellenization
of his dominions, and since Judaea was under his control, he replaced the
orthodox high priest Onias by the "reform" liberal minded Jason,
whose name itself was a Hellenization of the Hebrew Joshua. Says Paul Johnson:

"Jason began the transformation of Jerusalem into a polis, renamed
Antiochia, by constructing a gymnasium at the foot of the Temple Mount.
The Second Book of Maccabees furiously records that the Temple priests
'ceased to show any interest in the service of the altar; scorning the
Temple and neglecting the sacrifices, they would hurry to take part in
the unlawful exercises [in the nude] on the training-ground"' (p.102).

In 167 the conflict came to a head. A decree was published which in
effect abolished the Mosaic Law, replacing it with secular law. The Temple
was reduced to an "ecumenical" place of interdenominational worship,
and as such, the statue of the pagan god called the Olympian Zeus was placed
within its precincts. This act was probably inspired by Menelaus, who thought
a drastic move was needed to end, once and for all, the Jewish Temple worship
and Law. His acts divided the priests, aroused the people, and led to further
escalation of conflict. Opposed to him were the scribes, the orthodox priests,
and the most pious Jews or hasidim. To them, there was no difference between
the new "universalism" and the old Baal-worship, condemned in
the Scriptures. They refused to sacrifice in the "new" way and
to bow down before the "new" altars, and revolted against the
government of Antiochus, leading to civil war. By December 164 B.C. they
drove the Greeks out of Jerusalem and its surroundings, and cleansed the
Temple and reinstituted the prescribed sacrifices. In 152 B.C. the Greeks
abandoned their attempt to Hellenize the Jews by force, and recognized
Jonathan, son of Matthias Hasmon, as the new high priest. The Hasmoneans
held the office for the next 115 years. Simon Maccabee succeeded his brother
as high priest, and Judaea became independent once again.

Says Johnson, the assault against the Law of God was met by a corresponding
zeal for the Law. Henceforth talk of "reform" was denounced as
"nothing less than total apostasy and collaboration with the foreign
oppression" (p.105). Pious Jews began to develop a national system
of schools where Jewish boys were taught the Torah. This led to the development
and spread of the synagogue, and "the birth of Pharisaism as a movement
rooted in popular education, and eventually in the rise of the rabbinate"
(p. 106). They taught, in addition to the written Law, the Oral Law, "by
which learned elders could interpret and supplement the sacred commands.
The practice of the Oral Law made it possible for the Mosaic code to be
adapted to changing conditions and administered in a realistic manner"
(ibid..).

"By contrast," says Johnson, "the Temple priests, dominated
by the Sadducees, or descendants of Zadok . . . insisted that all law must
be written and unchanged. They had their own additional text, called the
Book of Decrees, which laid down a system of punishment: who were to be
stoned, who burned, who beheaded, who strangled.... The Sadducees soon
became identified with Hasmonean rule in a rigid system of Temple administration,
in which the hereditary high priest performed the functions of a secular
ruler, and a committee of elders, the Sanhedrin, discharged his religious-legal
duties" (ibid. ).

Simon's third son, John Hyrcanus, succeeded him and ruled from 134-104
B.C. His son, Alexander Jannaeus, ruled from 103-76 B.C., calling himself
"Jonathan the king" on the coins produced in his realm. Says
Johnson of the Hasmoneans, "They began as the avengers of martyrs,
they ended as religious oppressors themselves. They came to power at the
head of an eager guerrilla band; they ended surrounded by mercenaries.
Their kingdom, founded on faith, dissolved in impiety" (p.107). Alexander
Jannaeus became a "despot and a monster" and persecuted the religious
Jews. He was drawn to Greek Hellenism and came to despise the "barbarous"
aspects of the Jewish religion, the Torah, and its requirements.

As high priest, leading the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles,
he refused to perform the libation ceremony, according to the custom, and
as a result pious Jews pelted him with lemons. Outraged by their behavior,
he proceeded to slay about 6,000 of them, according to the history of Josephus.
As a result, civil war once again erupted, and in the following six years
some 50,000 Jews lost their lives. Says Johnson:

"It is from this time we first hear of the Perushim or Pharisees,
'those who separated themselves,' a religious party which repudiated the
royal religious establishment, with its high-priest, Sadducee aristocrats
and the Sanhedrin, and placed religious observance before Jewish nationalism.
Rabbinic sources record the struggle between the monarch and this group,
which was a social and economic as well as a religious clash. As Josephus
noted, 'the Sadducees draw their following only from the rich, and the
people do not support them, whereas the Pharisees have popular allies"'
(p.108).

At the end of the civil war, Alexander returned to Jerusalem, victorious
over his enemies, and as he feasted with his concubines, he ordered 800
of his enemies to be crucified, and while they yet lived, had their children's
and wives' throats cut before their very eyes. He himself died in 76 B.C.
after a bout of hard drinking leading to what Josephus called a "distemper."

Alexander's widow, Salome, saw that his policies were leading to disaster,
and sought to change matters and restore national unity. She brought the
Pharisees into the Sanhedrin and made their Oral Law acceptable in royal
justice. She died in 67 B.C.

Her sons fell out fighting over the succession, and Hyrcanus, one of
them, had a powerful chief minister, Antipater, who was Idumean. He brokered
a deal with Rome in 63 B.C. and Judaea became a Roman client-state. His
son became Herod the Great, who ruled from 37 B.C. to 4 B.C., when he died.
Herod was a paranoid megalomaniac:

"His first act on assuming power in Jerusalem in 37 B.C. was to
execute forty-six leading members of the Sanhedrin who, in his own case
and others, had sought to uphold the Mosaic law in secular matters. Henceforth,
it became a religious court only. He did not even attempt to become high
priest himself and divorced it from the crown by turning it into an official
post, appointing and dismissing high-priests as acts of his prerogative,
and picking them mainly from the Egyptian and Babylonian diaspora"
(p. 111).

During his reign, Herod was exceptionally generous to the Temple, which
he began rebuilding and restoring. He built huge supporting walls, filled
in the gaps with rubble, doubled the area of the Temple Mount, extending
it toward the south, and erected porticos around the vast forecourt. The
platform was 35 acres in size and a mile in circumference and more than
twice the height of the present Temple Mount as seen today. Some of the
building blocks were 110 feet long, 25 feet high, 15 feet wide. On top
of the platform were the cloisters with hundreds of Corinthian pillars,
27 feet high and so huge that three men extending their arms could hardly
reach around them.

Nevertheless, Herod down-graded the importance of the high priest, who
was usually a hated Sadducee. In so doing, "Herod automatically raised
in importance his deputy, the segan, a Pharisee who got control over all
the regular Temple functions and ensured that even the Sadducee high-priests
performed the liturgy in a Pharisaical manner. Since Herod was on reasonable
terms with the Pharisees, he avoided conflict between the Temple and his
government, as a rule" (p. 118).

Who Controlled the Temple Functions ?

Let's notice that last quotation from Paul Johnson, A History of the
Jews, once again. Notice! By the time of Herod, who ruled from 37 B.C.
to 4 B.C., the position of high priest -usually held by one of the aristocratic
Sadducees, who was himself appointed to the office at the whim and discretion
and pleasure of the king, Herod himself -- was down-graded in importance.
The actual power to rule and regulate and control all the normal Temple
functions, including holy day observances, dates, and liturgies, rested
with the office of the "segan" -who was a PHARISEE appointed
to "assist" and "ensure" that the Sadducee high priest
did everything according to the prescribed manner. Thus the Pharisees had
control over all the Temple functions during the time of king Herod, from
37 B.C. to 4 B.C.!

Josephus, the first century Jewish historian, was himself a priest and
a Pharisee. In his Antiquities of the Jews, he informs us
that the Pharisees were the dominant religious party in Judaea during the
time of Christ, and says that they controlled the worship services. He
tells us that Pentecost, or the Feast of Weeks, therefore, was celebrated
on Sivan 6, fifty days after Passover. Josephus writes:

"But on the second day of unleavened bread, which is the sixteenth
day of the month, they first partake of the fruits of the earth, for before
that they do not touch them . . . They also at this participation of the
first-fruits of the earth sacrifice a lamb, as a burnt offering to God.
When a WEEK OF WEEKS has passed over after this sacrifice, (which week
contains forty and nine days,) on the fiftieth day, which is PENTECOST,
they bring to God a loaf, made of wheat flour . . ..(Ant.,
bk. III, chap. X, 5-6).

The hated Sadducees, however, figured Pentecost by counting fifty days
from the Sunday which falls within the days of unleavened bread. They interpreted
the expression "morrow after the Sabbath," found in Leviticus
23:15, from which date the count to Pentecost is to begin, as being the
day after the weekly Sabbath. The Pharisees, as Josephus says, however,
claim it was the Passover Annual Sabbath.

As we have seen, the Sadducees were the aristocratic, Hellenistic party,
which only had some of the rich on their side, but the vast multitudes
followed the Pharisees, as Josephus himself tells us. But even if this
was their own belief, it did not matter so far as the public Temple services
were concerned. The Temple services were controlled by the Pharisees! The
Pharisee SEGAN made sure that the Sadducee high priest did everything correctly,
at the appointed time, as the Pharisees taught!

Alfred Edersheim, in his book The Temple:

"The expression 'the morrow after the Sabbath,' has sometimes been
misunderstood as implying that the presentation of the so-called 'first
sheaf' was to be always made on the day following the weekly Sabbath of
the Passover-week. This view, adopted by the 'Boethusians' and the Sadducees
in the time of Christ, and by the Karaite Jews and certain modern interpreters,
rests on a misinterpretation of the word 'Sabbath.' As in analogous allusions
to other feasts in the same chapter, it means not the weekly Sabbath, but
the day of the festival. The testimony of Josephus, of Philo, and of Jewish
tradition, leaves no room to doubt that in this instance we are to understand
by the 'Sabbath' the 15th of Nisan, on whatever day of the week it might
fall" (The Temple: Its Ministry and Services, p. 257)

Nevertheless, some modern adherents to the Sadducean theory, claim that
the Pharisees were wrong, and the Sadducees were right. They claim that
the Sadducees were the high priests of the time of Christ and that they
controlled the Temple and its services.

As we have seen, this is pure hogwash. There is no evidence that the
Sadducees ever influenced more than a few of the rich, and that the Pharisees
controlled the Temple services, during the time of Herod and till the destruction
of the Temple in 70 A.D.

As additional New Testament proof that the Pharisees were correct, and
the Sadducees were '"out in left field" by themselves, and repudiated
by Christ and the apostle Paul, take note of the following facts:

1. When the Sadducees came to Him, trying to trick Him up with a tough
question, Jesus Christ Himself rebuked them, saying, "You are mistaken.
You understand neither the Scriptures nor the power of God" (Matthew
22.29). In the New Testament in Contemporary English, we
read Jesus' words: "You're off base on two counts: You don't know
your Bibles, and you don't know how God works." These Sadducees were
so far off base that they even denied the resurrection! (Matt. 22:23).

2. Of the Pharisees, however, Jesus said in approbation of their teaching
concerning the Law: "The scribes and the Pharisees are occupying Moses'
seat: therefore do and observe whatever they tell you, but do not behave
as they do" (Matt. 23:1-2). This sounds like a ringing endorsement
of the authority of the Pharisees, although Jesus rebuked them for their
sins and hypocrisy and attitudes.

3. The apostle Paul himself was a Pharisee, taught at the feet of Gamaliel,
a leading Rabban of the Jews of that period. As a Pharisee, therefore,
he had been taught that Pentecost was to be observed on Sivan 6, or fifty
days after Passover. He did not endorse the dating of the Sadducees. Did
Paul repent of his Pharisaic teaching and background, when he was converted,
and begin endorsing the Sadducean concept? Not at all ! Nowhere in the
writings of Paul does he ever suggest that the Pharisees were wrong, and
the Sadducees were right! To the contrary, he told the Jews in Jerusalem,
"I am a Jew, a native of Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in this
city. At the feet of Gamaliel 1 have been educated with exacting care in
our ancestral Law. . ." (Acts 22:2-3). He later told the Sanhedrin,
whom he noted were part of Sadducees and part of Pharisees (Acts 23:6),
"'Brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; concerning the
hope of the resurrection of the dead I am accused.' At this saying a dispute
arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and there was division in
the meeting. For the Sadducees maintain there is neither resurrection nor
angel nor spirit, while the Pharisees confess the one as well as the other.
So the outcry grew deafening. Some of the scribes of the Pharisees' party
got up and argued, 'We find nothing bad in this man; but if a spirit or
an angel has spoken to him . . .' And the discord grew so bitter that the
commander, afraid that Paul might be torn to pieces by them, ordered a
detachment to march down and snatch him from their midst" (Acts 23:6-10),
Berkeley Version).

4. In his letter to the Philippians, Paul wrote that he had been taught
the law of God as a Pharisee blamelessly, faultlessly. This could hardly
have been true if they had been all mixed up on the correct date to observe
Pentecost! Notice! He wrote, explaining, "If anyone else imagines
that he has some basis for confidence in the flesh, I am ahead of him:
circumcised on the eighth day, a native Israelite of the tribe of Benjamin,
a Hebrew of the Hebrews, as to the Law a Pharisee, as to zeal a persecutor
of the church, as to LEGAL RIGHTEOUSNESS WITHOUT BLAME" (Phil. 3:4-6).
Says The New Testament in Contemporary English, in these
verses: "You know my pedigree: a legitimate birth, circumcised on
the eighth day; an Israelite from the elite tribe of Benjamin; a STRICT
AND DEVOUT ADHERENT TO GOD'S LAW; a fiery defender of the purity of my
religion, even to the point of persecuting Christians; A METICULOUS OBSERVER
OF EVERYTHING SET DOWN IN GOD'S LAW BOOK."

It should be perfectly clear to any reasonable mind, not blinded by
prejudice and hatred of the truth, that Pentecost should be observed on
the date ascribed to it by the Pharisees-- and in the manner which they
approved of. Jesus Christ Himself never found fault with them as to the
date they observed Pentecost. He never criticized them on this issue. And,
furthermore, they never criticized either Him or the early Church for departing
from their approved date for observing Pentecost. They never rebuked Him
or His disciples for Heresy or False teaching in this regard -- which by
itself proves that they were in agreement with Him on this issue and point
of God's Law, and He was in agreement with them (Matt. 23:1-2 again)!

Elements of the Jewish and Muhammadan Calendars

In 1901, the Anglican Bishop Sherrard Beaumont Burnaby, a fellow in
the Royal Astronomical Society, published a book entitled Elements
of the Jewish and Muhammadan Calendars. In chapter IX of his book
he deals with the "Megillath Ta'anith," believed by scholars
to have been written in the period 67-69 A.D., derived from a paper delivered
by Rabbi M. Schwab in Paris in 1897. The original of this scroll is in
Aramaic.

Notice what this author has to say about the Pharisees, and their rivalry
with the Sadducees:

"After the independence of Judaea had been assured there commenced
a long series of disputes between the two sects of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
This was kept up until after the death of Alexander Jannaeus, in B.C. 79.
Graetz says that the bitter rivalry of the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel,
in the days of Rehoboam and Jeroboam, was repeated in the history of the
strife between the Pharisees and Sadducees.

"Under the reign of Queen Salome Alexandra, B.C. 79-70, who was
devoted to the Pharisees, the chief of that sect obtained the ascendancy,
and the PHARISEES CELEBRATED ALL THE DAYS UPON WHICH THEY HAD BEEN ESPECIALLY
SUCCESSFUL AGAINST THEIR ADVERSARIES" (p.258).

"The unfriendly relations between the Pharisees and the Sadducees
did not exist, to any extent, in the time of Hyrcanus. He made use of both
parties according to their capabilities; the Sadducees as soldiers and
diplomatists; the Pharisees as teachers of the Law, judges, and functionaries
in civil affairs . . . In point of fact Hyrcanus was personally in favour
of the Pharisees, but as Prince he could not quarrel with the Sadducees
. . . Until he was overtaken by old age Hyrcanus managed to solve the difficult
problem of keeping in a state of amity two parties who were always on the
verge of quarreling; but in the last years of his life he went quite over
to the Sadducees. He had been bitterly offended by a certain Eleazar ben
Poira, who had stated that his mother had been taken prisoner by the Syrians,
and that it was not fitting for the son of a prisoner to be a priest much
less a High Priest. Hyrcanus then deposed the Pharisees from the various
important posts that they had filled; and the offices belonging to the
Temple, to the courts of law, and to the High Council were given to the
followers of the Sadducees.

"Hyrcanus died in B.C. 106, a short time only after these events.
He had proclaimed his wife to be Queen, and his eldest son Judah, better
known by his Greek name Aristobulus, to be High Priest. Aristobulus supplanted
his mother on the throne, and put her in prison, together with three of
his four brothers. He died after a reign of one year, in B.C. 105.

"He was succeeded by his brother Alexander Jannaeus, the third
son of Hyrcanus. He reigned for twenty-seven years. During his reign the
Pharisees were again allowed to appear at Court. . . Ever since the secession
of Hyrcanus from Pharisaism the Great Council had been composed entirely
of Sadducees, but Jannaeus was disposed to bring about some kind of equality
between the two parties by dividing between them the offices of state.
. . After a time . . . Jannaeus became an inveterate opponent of the Pharisaic
teaching, and made his view public in a most insulting manner....

"Alexander Jannaeus died from fever, B.C. 79, during his siege
of one of the trans-Jordanic fortresses. On his deathbed, he repented of
his cruel persecution of the Pharisees, and gave various directions respecting
them to his wife, Salome Alexandra, who succeeded him as Queen. She was
a woman of gentle nature, and of sincere piety; she was still devoted to
the Pharisees, and entrusted them with the management of affairs without
persecuting the opposing party. The chief post in the Great Council was
given up to them. It was offered in the first place to her brother, Simon
ben Shetach, who, however, waived his own claim in favour of Judah ben
Tabbai, then in Egypt. The latter, on his return home, undertook, with
the help of Simon, the REORGANIZATION OF THE COUNCIL, AND THE RE-ESTABLISHMENT
OF RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCES. These two celebrated reformers have been called
'REBUILDERS OF THE LAW, ' 'Restorers of the glory of the crown (of the
Law). ' . . . " (p.259-260).

The Jewish Calendar gives us then the origin of various
Jewish days of observance. Discussing the time of Queen Salome Alexandra,
circa 79 B.C., we read:

"Nisan 8-22. Recalls the ordinance of the Pharisees that the Feast
of Weeks -- Pentecost -- should be celebrated on any day of the week, and
not be restricted upon the first day of the week, 'the morrow after the
Sabbath.' . . . M. Schwab says, 'It must be believed that for a certain
time, under the Sadducees, the Feast of Pentecost had been celebrated in
conformity with their teaching, that is to say, on 'the morrow after the
[weekly] Sabbath.'

"The Commentator says that when the Pharisees came into power they
changed this day to the fiftieth, counted from the second day of the Passover.
IN REMEMBRANCE OF THEIR TRIUMPH THEY CELEBRATED ALL THE FIFTEEN DAYS, FROM
NISAN 8 TO 23 . . ." (P.263).

When all the evidence is put together, then, it becomes increasingly
clear -- like the shining light of the dawn, rising toward midday -- that
the Pharisees were in control of the Temple, and conducted and supervised
the Temple services, during the time of Christ and the apostles. It is
also clear that Jesus Christ never reprimanded them for observing the incorrect
day, even though He remonstrated against them on many other accounts. It
is difficult to imagine that He would not have lashed out at their error,
if they were observing Pentecost on the wrong day! His very silence on
this issue, and His pronouncement that they-- not the Hellenistic Sadducees
-- sat in Moses' seat, and held Mosaic authority in respect to teaching
and interpreting the Law (Matt. 23:2-3) should be conclusive...

Some believe, however, that the Sadducees controlled the Temple during
the time of Christ. It would appear that this conclusion is based solely
upon the fact that the high priest himself was often a Sadducee. For example,
Caiaphas, the high priest who condemned Christ to execution, was a Sadducee
(Matt. 26:3,57; John 18:13, 14, 18, 28). However, as we have seen, the
high priest himself was subject to the directions of the religious-minded
Pharisees as to rituals and observances and ceremonies held at the Temple.
The scroll of the Megillath Ta'anith lists the days Nisan 8-22 as the days
the Pharisees celebrated for their gaining control of the counting of Pentecost
which they did from the second day of Passover.

The Sadducean Apostates

James Hastings, in his authoritative multi-volume Dictionary of
the Bible, tells us the real nature of the Sadducees and their
true apostasy -- the sect which the Worldwide Church of God and all its
present off-shoots follow concerning Pentecost calculations. Hastings declares:

"The Sadducees were the spiritual descendants of the priestly party
in Jerusalem, which, towards the close of the Greek period of Israel's
history, was ANXIOUS TO HELLENIZE the Palestinian Jews. The Maccabean rising,
which was caused by the attempt of Antiochus Epiphanes to accomplish this
by violence, taught these HELLENIZERS the folly of tampering with the national
religion . . . Their descendants, however, SPEEDILY ACCOMMODATED THEMSELVES
to the new order of things, which was in many respects after their mind
. . .

"The successors of the Hellenizers . . . were in full sympathy
with the secular policy of the Hasmonean princes, and, unlike the Pharisees,
took no exception to the illegitimacy of their high priesthood. They entered
the service of the new princes as soldiers and diplomatists, and, drawing
around them the leading adherents of the new dynasty, formed the party,
to which was given their family name of Zadokites or Sadducees. Taught
by experience, this party made no violent attempts to introduce Greek customs;
but they were a PURELY POLITICAL PARTY; their main interest was in the
Jewish State as an independent State, and not, like that of the Pharisees,
in the legal purity of the Jews as a religious community....

"From their first appearance in history as a distinct party (during
the reign of John Hyrcanus, B.C. 135-105), the Sadducees were the devoted
adherents of the Hasmonaean princes. Under Aristobulus I, and Alexander
Jannaeus, the immediate successor of John Hyrcanus, their party was supreme.
Under Alexandra Salome the Pharisees were for a short time in possession
of power; but when Aristobulus II became king the Sadducees once more came
to the front. They supported him in the conflict with Hyrcanus II, Antipater,
and the Romans, and they also stood by him and his two sons, Alexander
and Antigonus, in their attempt to restore the Hasmonaean dynasty. BUT
THE DAY OF THEIR POLITICAL POWER WAS NOW PAST. Their numbers were also
considerably reduced. When Pompey captured Jerusalem (B.C. 63) he executed
many of their leaders, as did also Herod (B.C. 37). Herod further DIMINISHED
their influence by appointing and removing high priests according to HIS
OWN PLEASURE, and by filling the Sanhedrin with his own creatures"
("Sadducees," vol. IV, p.349).

Says Hastings concerning the Pharisees, "But the latter were the
REAL POSSESSORS OF POWER, for, in order to render themselves tolerable
to the people, the Sadducees were COMPELLED TO ACT IN MOST MATTERS IN ACCORDANCE
WITH PHARISAIC PRINCIPLES. And when Jerusalem was destroyed and Israel
ceased to exist as a nation, they speedily disappeared entirely from history"
(ibid.).

Concerning the differences between the Sadducees and Pharisees, Hastings
notes the following:

"The Pharisees were, in their own peculiar way, intensely religious
[just as the apostle Paul tells us -- Romans 10:1]; their great desire
was to mold their fellow countrymen into a 'holy' nation by means of the
Law; they looked forward to a future, in which their hopes were sure to
he realized, and could therefore meanwhile endure the foreign dominion,
provided it allowed them perfect religious freedom. The SADDUCEES, on the
other hand, WERE LARGELY INDIFFERENT TO RELIGION, except in so far as it
was a matter of custom; their great care was for the State as a purely
secular State; they were satisfied with the present, so far as it permitted
them to live in comfort and splendor" (p.350).

Concerning the matters of the Festivals, the Sadducees differed from
the Pharisees on the figuring of Pentecost, as we have noted. Hastings
points out:

"As to the Feasts, the two parties differed in the manner of fixing
the date of Pentecost. According to Lev. 23:11, 15, seven full weeks had
to be counted from 'the morrow after the Sabbath' upon which the priest
waved the sheaf of firstfruits before the Lord. The PHARISEES followed
the TRADITIONAL interpretation (e.g. in the LXX; cf. Ant.3,X,S), that the
'Sabbath' meant the first day of the feast, and that consequently Pentecost
might fall on any day of the week. The Sadducees (or rather, according
to Schurer . . . the Boethusians, a variety of the Sadducees) held that
the 'Sabbath' meant the weekly Sabbath, and that therefore Pentecost always
fell on the first day of the week" (p.351).

Witness of the Septuagint

Hastings mentions the LXX, or Septuagint, as being one
of the sources showing that the true, traditional interpretation of the
"Sabbath" in Leviticus 23:11, 15 refers to the first holy day
of the Feast of Unleavened Bread -- that is, the Passover Holy Day, when
the Passover was eaten, on Nisan 15. What is the Septuagint?
It is commonly referred to as LXX, a reference to the "70 Jewish scholars"
(there were 6 from each tribe, according to tradition, one from each of
the twelve tribes -thus there may have actually been 72 translators) who
translated the Pentateuch from Hebrew into Greek during the reign of Ptolemy
Philadelphus, approximately 250 B.C. This was the official translation
of the Sanhedrin and the Jewish Court and the first translation of the
Holy Scriptures into a foreign language. Greek was the language of most
of the Mediterranean world at that time, and the Egyptian king desired
a copy of the famous Jewish "Law" in his world renown library
at Alexandria, Egypt.

This was the OFFICIAL translation of the Hebrew Pentateuch (the five
books of Moses) into Greek. As such, it was used by Jews throughout the
Mediterranean, in synagogues everywhere, and even in Palestine.

What does the Septuagint say about the calculation of Pentecost? Notice
its clear voice in this English translation:

"(4) These are the feasts of the Lord, holy convocations, which
ye shall call in their seasons. (5) In the first month on the fourteenth
day of the month, between the evening times [i.e.., during the afternoon
of Nisan 14, between noon and sunset; Josephus tells us the lambs were
actually slain between 3-5 o'clock -- see Wars of the Jews, Bk. VI, ch.
IX, para. 3] is the Lord's Passover. (6) And on the fifteenth day of this
month is the feast of unleavened bread to the Lord; seven days shall ye
eat unleavened bread. (7) And the FIRST DA Y shall be a holy convocation
to you; ye shall do no servile work. (8) And ye shall offer whole-burnt
offerings to the Lord seven days; and the seventh day shall be a holy convocation
to you: ye shall do no servile work. (9) And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying,
(10) Speak to the children of Israel, and thou shalt say to them, When
ye shall enter into the land which I give you, and reap the harvest of
it, then shall you bring a SHEAF, THE FIRST-FRUITS of your harvest, to
the priest; (11) and he shall lift up the sheaf before the Lord, to be
accepted for you. ON THE MORROW OF THE FIRST DAY THE PRIEST SHALL LIFT
IT UP....

"(15) And ye shall number to yourselves FROM THE DAY AFTER THE
SABBATH, FROM THE DAY ON WHICH YE SHALL OFFER THE SHEAF OF THE HEAVE-OFFERING,
SEVEN FULL WEEKS: UNTIL THE MORROW AFTER THE LAST WEEK ye shall number
FIFTY DAYS . . . " (The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and
English, Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton, Hendrickson Publishers; Lev.
23:4-15, p. 159-160).

What does this passage clearly tell us? The wave sheaf offering was
performed by the priest on the "morrow of the first day" -- and
the "first day" was the FIRST DAY OF THE FEAST! Compare verses
7 and 11, and you will see the truth, plain as day, clear as crystal, and
as obvious as the sun on a bright day.

Now, what is also interesting, is that Jesus Christ and the apostles
of the early New Testament Church often quoted from the Septuagint
in their Biblical references to the Old Testament! Many scholars and commentators
have remarked on this amazing and undeniable fact. It becomes very obvious
when comparing Biblical quotations in the New Testament Greek language
with the Septuagint, as opposed to the Massoretic text! Clearly,
therefore, Jesus and His disciples used the Septuagint many
times, and in so doing must have considered the texts they used from it
authoritative and inspired Scripture!

There can be no question, therefore, as to the real meaning of Leviticus
23:1 1, 15. It refers to the day after the Passover -- or Nisan 16 -- just
as the Pharisees themselves taught and practiced!

I might mention, at this point, that the King James Version, in verse
15, mistranslates the latter part of this verse, and verse 16, the word
"Sabbath." It says: "seven Sabbaths shall be completed.
Count fifty days to the day after the seventh Sabbath." This poses
a problem. How do you "complete" a "Sabbath"? Or seven
of them? A Sabbath is a whole day, from sunset on Friday till sunset on
Saturday, the seventh day of the week. It is not observed "partially."
There would be no need to tell somebody to "complete" a Sabbath
. But the Septuagint uses the word "WEEK" in this place. It says:
"You shall number to yourselves from the day after the Sabbath . .
. seven FULL WEEKS: UNTIL THE MORROW AFTER THE LAST WEEK ye shall number
fifty days."

Notice! You can "complete" a week -- it is seven whole days.
A complete week is seven FULL days, and seven FULL weeks is a total of
49 days (no partial "weeks"). The word the King James translates
"Sabbaths" is this case ought to be translated, as the Septuagint
has it, "WEEKS." Many modern translations do so. The Jewish Tanakh
has this passage: ". . . you shall count off seven weeks. They must
be complete: you must count until the day after the SEVENTH WEEK."
The Septuagint, however, makes this passage perfectly plain.
Why do people get mixed up on this?

Jesus Christ Versus the Sadducees

Jesus Christ did not come into conflict with the Sadducees till the
close of His ministry, since they were not the religious teachers of the
people, but more of a political party concerned mainly with the spoils
and patronage of the political system and used the high priesthood for
the wealth and opulence it brought to them. Says James Hastings:

"It was only toward the close of His life that our Saviour came
into open conflict with them. They had little influence with the people,
ESPECIALLY IN RELIGIOUS MATTERS; His criticism was therefore mainly directed
against the Pharisees and scribes, the supreme religious authorities, although,
according to Matt. 16:6, 11, He also warned His disciples against the leaven
of the Sadducees, meaning, probably, their utterly secular spirit. They,
on their part, seem to have ignored Him, until, by driving the moneychangers
out of the Temple (Matt.21:12, Mark 11:15. Luke 19:45), He interfered with
the prerogatives of the Sanhedrin. His acceptance of the Messianic title
'son of David' also filled them with indignation against Him (Matt. 21:15).
They accordingly joined the scribes and Pharisees in opposition to Him,
and sought to destroy Him (Mark 11:18, Luke 19:47), first, however, attempting
to discredit Him in the eyes of the people, and to bring down upon Him
the vengeance of the Romans, by their questions as to His authority, as
to the resurrection, and as to the lawfulness of paying tribute to Caesar
(Matt. 21: 23, 22:23, Mark 11:27, 12:l8, Luke 20:1, 19, 27). In the Sanhedrin
that tried Him they probably formed the majority, and the 'chief priests,'
who presided, belonged to their party" (p.351).

It should be obvious that the Sadducees were not really interested in
religion, as such, but rather in politics and temporal, secular power.
All their religious teachings, therefore, ought to make us suspect. Why
the Worldwide Church of God, and all of its modem off-shoot churches, should
continue doggedly to follow the Sadducees in their method and doctrine
of counting Pentecost, therefore, amazes me no end. Such spiritual "blindness"
is difficult to fathom, comprehend, or believe. Yet it is a palpable fact,
and the more one argues and protests, it seems, the more adamantine and
concrete-like they become in their opinions.

Unger's Bible Dictionary tells us a little more about
this strange, political-religious amalgamation called the Sadducees:

"Their political supremacy was, however, of no long duration. Greatly
as the spiritual power of the Pharisees had increased, the Sadducean aristocracy
was able to keep at the helm in politics. The price at which the Sadducees
had to secure themselves power at this later period was indeed a high one,
for they were IN THEIR OFFICIAL ACTIONS TO ACCOMMODATE THEM SELVES TO PHARISAIC
VIEWS. With the fall of the Jewish state the Sadducees altogether disappear
from history. Their strong point was politics. When deprived of this their
last hour had struck. While the Pharisaic party only gained more strength,
only obtained more absolute rule over the Jewish people in consequence
of the collapse of political affairs, the very ground on which they stood
was cut away from the Sadducees" ("Sadducees," p.954).

One final witness as to the true position of the Sadducees, and their
distinctive lack of real religious authority or power, during the time
of Christ, is Emil Schurer, author of the definitive four volume work,
The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Christ (175 B.C. --
AD 135), published in 1979. Dr.Schurer writes:

"The Pharisees maintained their leadership in spiritual matters,
especially in urban circles. It is true that the Sadducean high priests
stood at the head of Sanhedrin. But in fact it was the Pharisees, and not
the Sadducees, who made the greatest impact on the ordinary people. . .
The Pharisees had the masses for their allies, the women being especially
devoted to them. They held the greatest authority over the congregations,
SO THAT EVERYTHING TO DO WITH WORSHIP, PRAYERS, AND SACRIFICE TOOK PLACE
ACCORDING TO THEIR INSTRUCTIONS. Their popularity is said to have been
so high that they were listened to even when they criticized the king or
the high priest. They were in consequence able to restrain the king. For
the same reason, also, THE SADDUCEES IN THEIR OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS COMPLIED
WITH THE PHARISAIC REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE OTHERWISE THE PEOPLE WOULD NOT
HAVE TOLERATED THEM" (revised edition, vol. II, p.402).

Modern Judaism traces its descent from the Pharisees, not the Sadducees.
The Sadducees were wiped out totally when the nation of Judah collapsed,
and was destroyed. Their whole reason for existence was smashed. They were
annihilated. God had no reason to preserve them, or their teachings, and
they perished from off the pages of history, as a mere "blip"
in time, a mere "ripple" on the ocean of life. Their influence,
prestige, and power vanished with them.

But God Himself preserved the Pharisees, and the teachings of the Torah,
and the Oral Law, and kept His Word alive at the hands of the Jews, the
Pharisees, and their descendants, the Talmudists, and Massoretes, and succeeding
generations of Rabbis and scribes. Were it not for them, we would have
no holy sacred calendar, today, and we would have no idea of the beginning
of the sacred year, according to God's Calendar, or the annual holy days
(compare Rom. 3:1-2). Even though the Pharisees were far from perfect,
as the New Testament clearly shows, they were head and shoulders above
the Sadducees, and did teach the Law of God and preserved the sacred calendar
and knowledge of the festivals of God (Matt. 23:1-3).

Preconceived Pet Theories

One reason many Christians, who attempt to keep Pentecost, get confused
over this Scripture, and continue to count Pentecost improperly, as the
ignorant Sadducees did, following them in their abysmal darkness, is because
they misunderstand the meaning of the "first-fruits," or the
"wave sheaf' offering. They assume it refers to Christ having arisen
from the dead, after His crucifixion, as the "first-fruits."

There are several problems with this theory, however. First, Jesus Christ
was put into the grave, after His death, just before sunset on Nisan 14
-- Wednesday evening, 30 A.D. (see John 19:30-42). He was in the grave
for three days and three nights -- even as Jonah was three days and three
nights in the great fish's belly (see Matt. 12:40). He was therefore in
the grave a full 72 hours -- no more, no less! This means He was resurrected
and was the "firstfruits from the dead" late Sabbath afternoon,
before sunset -- not on a '"Sunday" morning at all! Therefore,
when the apostle Paul writes, "But now Christ is RISEN from the dead,
and has become the FIRST-FRUITS of those who have fallen asleep" (I
Cor. 15:20), he is writing of something which occurred SABBATH EVENING
not on a "Sunday" at all! Therefore a "Sunday" Pentecost
does NOT picture Christ as the "first-fruits" from the dead!

But let's notice more carefully, just what this "sheaf" of
first-fruits is composed of. Christ was the FIRST to rise from the dead,
but as Paul goes on: "But each one in his own order: Christ the first-fruits,
afterward they that are Christ's at His coming" (v.23). We, also,
who are called of God, chosen, elect, and precious in His sight (I Pet.
2:5, 9-10) -- we, also, are the FIRST-FRUITS of those who have received
God's Holy Spirit! As the apostle James writes, "Of His own will He
brought us forth by the word of truth, that we might be a KIND OF FIRST-FRUITS
of His creatures" (James 1:18). We are those who have received "the
FIRST-FRUITS of the Spirit" (Rom. 8:23). We will reign with Christ
over the earth during the millennium (Rev. 5:10; 20:1-4), as kings and
priests -- or, a kingdom of priests (a "royal priesthood").

John writes of these "first-fruits" of God's harvest in these
words: "And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
But the REST of the dead did not live again until after the thousand years
were finished. This [the first-fruits] is the FIRST resurrection. Blessed
and holy is he who has part in the FIRST resurrection. Over such the second
death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and
shall reign with Him a thousand years" (Rev. 20:4-6).

We are the first-fruits pictured by the wave sheaf offering! It is US
who are presented by the "high priest" -- a type of Jesus Christ,
our High Priest (Heb. 4:14) -- to God the Father in heaven, our acceptance
by God being made possible by the SACRIFICE of Christ, our Passover Lamb
(I Cor. 5:7-8)!

Do you see? WE are the firstfruits pictured by the wave sheaf, which
is a bundle of MANY plants of barley, harvested and threshed and beaten
and parched and prepared, as an offering to God. Alfred Edersheim describes
this ancient harvest this way:

"Already, on the 14th of Nisan, the spot whence the FIRST SHEAF
was to be reaped had been marked out by delegates from the Sanhedrin, by
tying together IN BUNDLES, while still standing, THE BARLEY that was to
be cut down.... When the time for cutting the sheaf had arrived, that is,
on the evening of the 1 5th of Nisan (even though it were a Sabbath), just
as the sun went down [Nisan 16th began], three men, each with a sickle
and basket, formally set to work. But in order clearly to bring out all
that was distinctive in the ceremony, they first asked of the bystanders
three times each of these questions: 'Has the sun gone down?' 'With this
sickle?' 'Into this basket?' 'On this Sabbath (or first Passover-day)?'
-- and, lastly, 'Shall I reap?' Having each time been answered in the affirmative,
they cut down barley TO THE AMOUNT OF ONE EPHAH, or ten omers, or three
seahs, which is equal to about THREE PECKS AND THREE PINTS of our English
measure. The ears were brought into the Court of the Temple, and THRASHED
OUT WITH CANES OR STALKS [beaten, but], so as not to injure the corn; then
'PARCHED' on a pan perforated with holes, so that EACH GRAIN MIGHT BE TOUCHED
BY THE FIRE [a type of trials and tests we Christians must endure! -- see
I Cor. 3:13-15], and finally exposed to the wind [ready to withstand the
wind of errors and false doctrines -- see Eph. 4:11-16 and James 1:5-7].
The corn thus prepared was GROUND IN THE BARLEY MILL, with the hulls left
whole. According to some, the FLOUR [our character] was always successfully
passed through thirteen sieves, each closer than the other [God refines
us, our character, to "perfection"!]. The statement of a rival
authority, however, seems more rational -- that it was only till the flour
was sufficiently fine, which was ascertained by one of the 'Gizbarim' (treasurers)
plunging his hands into it, the sifting process being continued so long
as any of the flour adhered to the hands. Though ONE EPHAH, OR TEN OMERS,
OF BARLEY WAS CUT DOWN [i.e., "many are called"], ONLY ONE OMER
OF FLOUR, or about 5.1 pints of our measure, WAS OFFERED IN THE TEMPLE
["few are chosen''] on the second Paschal, or 16th of Nisan. The rest
of the flour might be redeemed, and used for any purpose. The omer of flour
was mixed with a 'log,' or very nearly three-fourths of a PINT OF OIL [God's
Holy Spirit, this typifying], and a handful of frankincense [fragrant perfume,
a type of our prayers and praises of God] put upon it, then waved before
the Lord, and a handful taken out and burned on the altar" (The
Temple: Its Ministry and Services as they were in the time of Christ,
p.258-259).

Could anything be clearer? The "wave sheaf" of barley grain
-- some 5 pints of barley grain, thrashed, parched, and carefully sifted
-- represents US -- THE FIRST FRUITS OF THE LAMB OF GOD ! WE are the many
grains of barley, being refined, and anointed with God's Holy Spirit, and
offered to the Father, as the ones who have been called and chosen of God
during this life-time ! Our offering to the Father cannot take place UNTIL
Christ died for our sins, thus reconciling us to God. Passover had to come
first. And then we could be redeemed, and selected, and brought into the
presence of the Father, and waved as an offering to Him -- as we read in
the book of Revelation:

"Then I looked, and behold, a Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and
with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His Father's name
written in their foreheads. . . These are the ones who were not defiled
with women, for they are virgins [part of the bride of Christ -- see Eph.
5:25-27; Rev. 19:7-9]. These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever
He goes. These were redeemed from among men, BEING THE FIRST-FRUITS TO
GOD AND TO THE LAMB" (Rev. 14:1-4).

How plain -- how wonderful -- how awesome, incredible, and mind-boggling
-- it should be, as we contemplate these things! Oh how grievously we have
misunderstood! Oh how our minds have been clouded with error, and how subtly
we were duped by the devious machinations and clever distractions, and
twisting of Scripture, by the Devil and his minions and ministers and spiritual
impostors!

Does your mind even now, grasp it? Those of us called now, who have
received the "firstfruits of the Spirit" of God, we are the First-fruits
pictured in the Wave Sheaf offering!

The Messiah also said, "Do not suppose that I came to annul the
Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish but to complete them; for
I assure you, while heaven and earth endure not one iota or one projection
of a letter will be dropped from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever,
therefore, abolishes the least significant of these commands and so teaches
the people, he shall be of least significance in the kingdom of heaven;
but whoever shall observe and teach them shall be prominent in the kingdom
of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that
of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not at all enter into the kingdom
of heaven" (Matt. 5:17-20, Berkeley Version).

Is this "new truth" to you? Have you been observing "Pentecost"
or the "Feast of Weeks" on the wrong day all these years?

Have you been trying to keep "unholy" time "holy"?

Herbert Armstrong used to say that it is ten times harder to unlearn
error than to learn new truth! Learning is one thing. Obeying is another!
It is one hundred times harder to change a practice that is wrong, and
to break a bad habit, and to begin to keep a different day than one has
kept in the past. Human nature, which tends to get into a rut of habitual
action and practice, doesn't want to learn new things, and to get up out
of the rut, and to force itself to CHANGE!

The apostle Paul declared, "Therefore let him who thinks he stands
take heed lest he fall" (T Cor. 10:12). Paul also wrote: "Therefore
we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we
drift away. For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and
every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, how shall
we escape IF WE NEGLECT SO GREAT SALVATION . . . ? " (Heb. 2:1-3).

Some people will exclaim, "So what? What difference does it make,
anyhow? So long as you are sincere, and have faith in your local ministers,
can't you trust them to sort these things out?"

Unfortunately, experience has proved beyond doubt that in matters of
faith and eternal salvation, it is not wise to trust ANY MAN, lest he deceive
you, steal your crown, and lead you astray. Mere sincerity won't get the
job done. God demands OBEDIENCE to His Law -- and in this End-time, He
gives you plenty of evidence and proof so that you can KNOW the Truth -KNOW
the Law! Ignorance of the Law of God is no excuse!

After reading this article, the question is, do you FEAR GOD, and tremble
before His Word, and His Law, enough to OBEY HIM? Even if your own "church"
refuses to obey, will you step out on faith and follow Christ, Paul, and
God's Word in this matter, and put them ahead of your local congregation
or local minister?

Your eternal life could hang in the balance ! What will it be?

If you would like a FREE one-year subscription to PROPHECY FLASH
magazine, E-Mail your name and address to: tpm8579551@triumph.simplenet.com

If you prefer, write to:

Triumph Prophetic Ministries
P.O. Box 292
Altadena, CA 91003
U.S.A.

Be sure to visit Triumph's World Wide Web HOME PAGE at: http://triumph.simplenet.com

Our website contains an array of services and information -- be sure
to visit us soon!